Archives

Statement to the Parishioners of St. John's Church in Versailles, Kentucky   In August, 2002 our previous rector Alan Hansen left the parish. The bishop met with the vestry and recommended that the vestry be frozen until a new rector was called. We have remained in place in an effort to keep the wheels on and I think we have been successful in doing so. When Alan left, we were in a critical financial crunch, and the effects of 9/11 added to the crisis. The vestry worked diligently to reduce operating costs, and with the involvement of our dedicated parishioners, we were able to turn things around. Our year-end balance sheet shows assets of:   $246,165.48 in checking, money market, and investment accounts $1,056,972.58 in buildings and property $561,383.59 in restricted funds/trusts Total Assets of $1,864,521.65.   In December, the vestry made the following charitable contributions to various, deserving, outreach ministries:     Salvation Army - $2,000.00   Food For The Poor - $5,000.00   St. Agnes House “ 3,000.00   Shoes For Kenya - $1,500.00   10 Scholarships for Youth Quake - $1,800.00   ACTS 29 Ministry - $1,000.00   Woodford Ministerial Association (Food Pantry) - $1,200.00   Woodford Educational Endowment Fund - $1,000.00   Woodford Project Graduation - $500.00   Tuition to Asbury Seminary for Youth Minister Ron Garner - $2,500.00   For a total of $19,500.00     The budgetary surplus for 2003, after meeting our entire diocesan pledge amounts to $39,961.66. This alone should indicate how seriously this vestry has taken its stewardship responsibility. There can be very few churches in this diocese able to make a similar claim.     In August, 2003 after the National Convention, a letter was written to the bishop, stating clearly that the vestry was in disagreement with his vote in favor of the consecration of an openly gay bishop and the blessing of same-sex unions. We subsequently had four meetings in our church regarding differing viewpoints on what had transpired at the Convention, including one at which the bishop shared his opinions. In November, the vestry sent out surveys to see how each parishioner felt on the issues and in what direction they wanted our church to move. Of the 300+ surveys sent out, over 170 were completed and returned. A compilation of results told us that over 75% of St. Johns parishioners were in disagreement, that they would not be pledging as in the past, and that over 60% were in favor of aligning with an orthodox bishop within ECUSA, if it were a possibility.     A small group of parishioners went to the bishop to complain about what the vestry was doing. They clearly thought that we were planning on bringing in a new rector who would take us out of the diocese and the Episcopal Church. We were, in fact, searching for a rector who fit our parish profile, and we had hoped that eventually there would be adequate alternative oversight available. Never have we considered taking St. Johns out of the Episcopal Church. In fact, I wrote to one of this small group to explain that in a worst-case scenario, what would likely happen was that the vestry would resign at some point, leave St. Johns, and form a new mission church under an orthodox, biblically centered, Anglican affiliation. I further stated that we were not interested in seizing the property of St. Johns, and were certain to  leave the church in better financial condition than that in which we had found it. I defy anyone to demonstrate where this vestry has been anything other than completely devoted to the care of our congregation, deliberate and honorable in our search, true to the majority opinion of our congregation, and above reproach in the administration of our fiduciary duties to this parish.     On December 9, 2003, the vestry submitted the name of our chosen candidate for rector. The bishop replied December 9 that he was happy to give consideration to our candidate. On December 13, the bishop convened a meeting of the Executive Council to request that St. Johns be reduced to mission status. The vestry was not made aware of this meeting, and in fact, was hopeful that the bishop would initiate his background check and plan meetings with our candidate. On December 18, the bishop contacted our candidate and suggested that they meet January 5th and 6th, 2004. After cordial, but fruitless meetings, we awaited the bishops answer. On the evening of January 6th, records of the Executive Council meeting of December 13 were found, quite by accident, having been posted on the diocesan website. Vestry member, Judge Wilson met immediately the next day with the bishop, and was invited to the Executive Council meeting held that same evening, January 7. At this meeting, Judge pleaded with the bishop and the Executive Council to reconsider their actions. After facing a grueling session of questioning and intimidation, Judge left completely devastated.   The Executive Council ended having granted the bishop's request to reduce St. Johns to mission status. The vestry is to be removed, and the bishop is to take control of this church.     For 156 years, St. Johns has been aligned with the Protestant Episcopal Church. St. Johns is a corporation registered in the state of Kentucky. All property is titled to the senior warden and vestry of St. John’s Church. We have been asked repeatedly over the years to hand over the deed to this church to the bishop, but we have never done so. We have never borrowed money from the diocese. Clearly, the only way that the bishop can take over the property is by removing us from our elected positions and putting in place those persons who would be willing to turn the property over to him. The only concern the bishop has had throughout the process of the Executive Council meeting was in regard to the property and assets of St. Johns. In explaining the outcome of the meeting to me, Fr. Jay Pierce said those words to me verbatim.   Under the administration of this bishop, within this diocese, you can find 5 churches without rectors. Having bought a huge, old house in Lexington for use as an office, at a cost to the diocese of over a million dollars and restoring it at an additional cost of another half million dollars, this bishop now finds it necessary to extend his credit line from $100,000 in 2003 to $500,000 in 2004. He is taking money from trust funds to pay operating expenses, and is finding that pledges have diminished, making a budget impossible. As a result, he has enacted Canon 28, calling for an assessment of 18% of annual parish revenues. Based on our 2002 revenues, this assessment would total $64,213. An initial, adjusted assessment (to make it more palatable) brings our bill to $33,404 this year.     You now have the facts before you. I urge you to consider them carefully, before you allow this bishop to take control of your church. There is so much at stake here. The actions of this bishop toward St. Johns have been destructive to individual families within our parish, to the unity of the parish family, and the diocese as a whole. Our fate is to serve as an example for all the other parishes in this diocese. As a bishop, this man is expected to lead his flock, not beat it into submission.     We have asked for alternative Episcopal oversight as set forth by the Primates of the Anglican Communion. We are not, nor have we ever sought to be anything other than faithful, orthodox Anglicans. One of many examples is that for a decade, we have been a primary advocate of the Alpha Course throughout the state. Alpha is a uniquely Anglican approach to evangelization enthusiastically endorsed by the past and current Archbishops of Canterbury. The only reason we can imagine why this bishop would act in such an uncanonical and unethical manner towards us is his deep animosity towards evangelical and orthodox Anglicans.     I am saddened by the prospects for my church. Serving this church alongside such dedicated people has been a great honor. However, the effort has become a heavy burden. Our lives have been filled with fear, pain, anger, and ultimately, great sadness. That is not what God intended for his people. We will continue to pray for each of you, and always for our beloved St. Johns Church.     In His service,   Mr. Thomas J. Thornbury Sr. Warden, St. Johns Church, Versailles, Kentucky   END

BY DAVE MUNDAY Of The Post and Courier Staff     The decision of a South Carolina parish to leave the Episcopal Church has left many in the Diocese of South Carolina confused and hurt, according to the chairman of a committee that tried to work out a compromise.     I think there’s a lot of hurt, the Rev. Craige Borrett, rector of Christ St. Paul’s Episcopal Parish of Yonges Island, said Sunday. We are breaking with family. There's a tear in the family.  Borrett and other members of the diocesan standing committee met for several hours Jan. 5 with the vestry of All Saints Church of Pawleys Island to try to find a way to keep the parish from voting to leave the denomination, which it did Thursday, he said.     The majority in the diocese, and those at All Saints, are deeply concerned about the crisis in the Episcopal Church, Borrett said in a report after the meeting. We strongly believe that our working together is the best witness in this struggle.     The committee asked the parish to delay its vote for a year to allow time for leaders of the worldwide Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church’s parent group, to come up with a plan to discipline the Episcopal Church for approving an openly gay bishop last summer.     In return for All Saints delaying the vote, the standing committee offered to ask S.C. Bishop Ed Salmon to:    -- Drop an ongoing lawsuit over the diocese asserting a legal interest in the property (should the congregation decide to leave the denomination).     -- Give All Saints a seat, voice and vote at the next diocesan convention (privileges lost three years ago after All Saints sued the diocese over a public notice stating its interest in the property).     -- Reinstate All Saints vestry (which Salmon declared ineligible for office last month after the vestry voted to recommend that the congregation leave the Episcopal Church).     -- Restore All Saints to a parish (Salmon demoted the congregation to mission after the vestry’s vote).     -- Cancel a scheduled meeting to appoint a new vestry.   Salmon agreed to all the recommendations except dropping the lawsuit.   In light of the fact that the appeal of the lawsuit has already been heard, and the ruling from the court is still pending, the bishops discernment was to wait for the court’s ruling, Borrett said in his report.     All Saints leaders said that if Salmon was not willing to drop the lawsuit, they would proceed with the vote to leave the denomination. The congregation voted Thursday to cut its ties with the Episcopal Church USA and come under the oversight of the Episcopal Church of Rwanda, an African member of the Anglican Communion. The decision was a big disappointment, Borrett said.   There was no imminent threat of the bishop coming up there and forcing them to do anything, he said. Everybody said, Please, don’t do it, and they went right ahead and did it.     Salmon could not be reached for comment Sunday.     Salmon appointed a new vestry Friday, but there are no immediate plans for an alternate service for those remaining loyal to the Episcopal Church, which is usual denominational policy, said the Rev. Kendall Harmon, the dioceses communications officer.     It’s still our hope that cooler heads will prevail and there might be a way for this decision to be reconsidered, he said.     That's the hope of many in the diocese, according to the Rev. Marc Boutan, associate rector at St. Philips Church in Charleston.     We need your voice along with ours to stand for the historic Christian faith against the tide of revisionism, Boutan said in a letter sent to All Saints leaders this weekend.     The diocese and All Saints agree that the Episcopal Church went beyond the boundaries of acceptable Anglican practice in approving an openly gay bishop. But All Saints can no longer hope to reform the Episcopal Church, Rwandan Bishop Chuck Murphy, a former rector who is the church’s main leader, said before last Thursday's vote. All Saints is home to the Anglican Mission in America, a network of churches that have left the Episcopal Church but maintain ties to the Anglican Communion through the primates of Rwanda and Southeast Asia.     The diocese, on the other hand, plans to join an emerging network of Episcopalians who publicly oppose the denominations actions on sexuality. Those in the network hope the majority of the primates (the 38 provincial leaders of the Anglican Communion) will recognize them as the legitimate expression of the Anglican faith in America.     The vote puts the congregation of All Saints at risk of losing the use of the property, which includes the historic chapel and $10 million worth of new buildings on 50 acres. Episcopal Church laws state that individuals can quit the Episcopal Church, but the property must remain for the use of those loyal to the denomination.     It’s a risk were willing to take, the Rev. David Bryan, one of the church’s pastors, said in a Sunday sermon in the historic chapel that’s used for traditional services. We believe the truth is more important than property.     Many of the 38 votes against leaving the denomination Thursday came from those who attend services in the old chapel, said longtime member George Saussy.     I’m still an Episcopalian, he said. I guess I’m a visitor here this morning.     He planned to keep attending services in the old chapel as usual. Most of those in the old church don’t pay much attention to what goes on in the newer buildings across the street, he said.     Most of the 468 members who voted to leave the denomination attend more contemporary services in the newer complex, which includes a much bigger auditorium with projection screens for praise and worship songs.   END

Midwest Conservative Journal Webster Groves, Missouri - Copyright 2004, by Christopher S. Johnson 1/15/2004     Last Sunday at Washington National Cathedral, on the occasion of the celebration of the Baptism of Our Lord, Frank Griswold delivered a sermon that demonstrated once again that whatever his religion is, it isn’t Christianity:     North Dakota nominates one bishop candidate by petition N.D. EPISCOPAL DIOCESE: Candidate for bishop draws opposition     Associated Press     FARGO - Voters in North Dakotas Episcopal Diocese will have six candidates instead of five to choose from when they select a new bishop next month.     Three clergy and three lay persons nominated the Rev. Henry Thompson III of Coraopolis, Pa., through a petition process. He joins five others picked by a selection committee. None of those five candidates has directly expressed his views on the recent confirmation of the openly gay New Hampshire bishop, the Rev. Gene Robinson. Thompson disagrees with the confirmation of homosexual clergy but said it is important to work together.     The search committee's lack of direct questions regarding homosexuality angered some members of the diocese, who used the petition process to nominate Thompson. Thompson had been rejected by the search committee.     I think he’s a very well-rounded candidate, said the Rev. John Floberg, of Thompson. Floberg said he led the petition drive to give the diocese a broader range of candidates.     Donna Pettit, the search committee chairwoman, said she believes the committee came up with a list of qualified candidates. I’m disappointed, she said. The committee worked very hard.     North Dakota Bishop Andy Fairfield, who strongly opposed the election of Robinson, retired in August.     The other five candidates to succeed him are the Rev. Christopher Chornyak, of Ellsworth, Maine; the Rev. George Martin, of Edina, Minn.; the Rev. Michael Smith, of White Earth, Minn.; the Rev. John Shepard of Spokane, Wash.; and the Rev. Peter Stebinger, of Bethany, Conn.     The election of the next bishop for the North Dakota diocese will be Feb. 7 at  Fargos Gethsemane Cathedral. One candidate must receive a majority of votes, or the nomination and election process will start over.     END

by Louis Victor Priebe Washington Correspondent   WASH., DC,  Jan. 13 “  An upcoming Public Broadcasting System (PBS)  program featuring a debate on gay marriage with ECUSA gay Bishop Gene  Robinson taking the pro position was assessed by a panel of concerned  Christians last week at the National Press Club.  Participants concluded  that, with cautious optimism, the program, narrated by Bryant Gumbel,  could be expected to reflect a balanced and fair assessment of the  controversial subject. The January 27 program is scheduled to air at 9:00 pm EST on local PBS  affiliates and to feature excerpts from a debate taped on January 4 at  historic Christ Church in Philadelphia, founded in 1695 and site of  Benjamin Franklins grave.  The debate was between newly elected  homosexual ECUSA Bishop Vickie Eugene Robinson and Dr. Bob Wenz, vice  president for National Ministries of the National Association of  Evangelicals.     Dr. Wenz reported that the hour-long program, Flashpoints USA, will  include three segments on the national motto One Nation Under God,  public display of the Ten Commandments and gay marriage.  The other  segments were taped in Philadelphia at nearby Independence Hall  featuring Alabama Judge Roy Moore and Constitution Hall.  These  religious issues are certain to be raised during the 2004 Presidential  campaign, in the debate over the Federal Marriage Amendment Act and in  prominent court tests.     During the fast-moving 25-minute taping, Dr. Wenz said he was able to  make three important points: Homosexual sex is a counterfeit of what  God intended for human sexuality Homosexual behavior is outside of God’s created order for procreation Marriage is a sacred institution between a  man and a woman, ordained by Almighty God and not to be altered.     Robinson, Dr. Wenz reported, maintained the deviant liberal position  that the Bible is always open to interpretation by each generation.  Robinson studiously evaded such central topics as the nature homosexual  behavior with regard to actual practices and their consequences.   Dr.  Wenz observed that If you are not truly objective, you can come up with  any conclusion you want ¦depending on your revisionist bias at the outset  of an analysis.       Dr. Wenz said that he sought to convey what Biblically faithful  Christians are for, more than what we are against.  He underscored  that God’s word is definitive on the subject on homosexuality and that  homosexual behavior affronts reason and Go’s intended role for humankind.     The assessing panel meeting at Washington’s eminent National Press Club  included Rev. Martin H. Granger, president of Faith in the Family  International, Rev. Ralph Weitz, a pastor at Immanuel Bible Church in  Springfield, Virginia, Rev. Earle Fox, founder and president of Emmaus  Ministries and Allan D. Dobras, a diversely published Christian  researcher and author. They had initially expressed skepticism at the  hands of moderator Gumbel, whose broadcasting career has placed him in  an adversarial relationship with many biblical positions.     There’s no question about it, Dr. Wenz observed, Robinson is being  positioned as the national ˜gay Bishop spokesman, not just the  Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire.  He said tolerance of anyone’s  behavior  “ regardless of its morality or its consequences  “  has  become the supreme value in the religion of revisionist religious  figures who advocate conformity to the secular culture.     Many questions were left unasked in Philadelphia due to limited time.  A transcript of the entire proceedings will be provided.  The assessment  panels participants said they hoped ˜set-ups for questions wouldn’t  reflect liberal bias and that editing would not juxtapose altered  questions with responses.     The group concluded that the macro issue being debated was Biblical  veracity and authority and that gay ordination and marriage were subsets  to it.   Participants concluded that, despite ECUSAs dramatically  declining membership, what the denomination does has an important impact  on contemporary culture and all of Christendom.  The PBS program, they  felt, should help enlighten people on the importance of the topic.       Dr. Wenz had entered the debate well-prepared with Ten Principal  Messages as talking points. Although he did not have time to make all of  these points, they follow this article to help expand and amplify  important topics related to the issue of gay marriage, ordination and  other issues relevant to homosexuality.     Dr. Wenz said he plans to author an article entitled If I Were Your  Pastor focusing on Robinsons behavior and his divisive role in the  Christian community and advising repentance and return to Biblical  standards.     Website for the National Association of Evangelicals is http://www.nae.net   END

Anglican Mainstream’s leadership have given a fulsome welcome to the announcement that Canon Stephen Cottrell is to be the next Bishop of Reading, but is it not odd that they are welcoming the appointment of a man who is reported as holding a completely contrary view to theirs on the very issue which led to the formation of Anglican Mainstream, namely his support for the attempt to appoint Jeffrey John. It is true that the new bishop designate has a high-profile commitment to evangelism and accepts the practical boundaries laid down by the House of Bishops Report Issues in Human Sexuality, but he has not committed himself to maintaining orthodox and biblical teaching on homosexuality. Indeed, his reported comments make it clear that he regards this as provisional: We need to listen to what God is saying, what the scriptures are saying. We need to listen to gay and lesbian people in our church - we need to listen to what the world says.   The substantive theological differences between Stephen Cottrell and Jeffrey John, both of whom are members of the liberal Affirming Catholicism group, do not seem to be of any great significance, yet the one is warmly welcomed while the other triggers the formation of an unprecedented international coalition.     Why should this be? Perhaps the reason why evangelicals managed to came together over the Jeffrey John episode was that it was a remarkably unsubtle appointment, the attempt to prefer a man with a track record as proponent of the gay/lesbian cause in a diocese with a strong evangelical presence. Stephen Cottrell represents a much more institutionally savvy way of doing things because he is theologically of a similar mould to Jeffrey John, but sails under an orthodox flag of convenience which has misled some into thinking he is actually an evangelical.   Anglican Mainstream has therefore got itself into an incoherent position. It claims to be upholding biblical truth, but in practice has shown that what really matters is  the appearance of orthodoxy rather than the substance. It does not seem to matter what a bishop teaches, or fails to teach, so long as he observes the current institutional rules.   This is a view of Christian leadership which is clearly at variance with the New Testament requirement that those who exercise oversight should have the personal integrity of  holding on to faith and a good conscience (1 Tim 1:19). In fact, this failure to follow through the biblical logic of their opposition to Jeffrey Johns appointment has left Anglican Mainstream vulnerable to the revisionist accusation of homophobia. Much has been made of the fact that Stephen Cottrell is a family man so it would seem that what you teach does not matter very much, but who you chose to share your bed with does.     That Anglican Mainstream has come  intentionally or not - to split off biblical teaching from biblical practice should not be a total surprise. There seems never to have been a recognition on their part that the Archbishop of Canterbury is himself a significant part of the problem because this is exactly what he has done  sought to separate his ecclesiological practice from his personal (yet well publicised) views.     The bitter consequence for him was that he had to publicly abandon Jeffery John, a long standing friend, for the sake of institutional unity; the bitter consequence for Anglican Mainstream will be that it loses its way in a marshland of ecclesiastical compromise unless it can quickly put its house in order.     The church I now lead, Christ Church Kidderminster, came into being as The outcome of a principled decision to disassociate from the spiritual authority of the current Bishop of Worcester, albeit a family man, who actively and openly supported the gay lesbian agenda and therefore rejected the authority of Gods Word which is the basis of his office.   Despite pressure to compromise from certain senior evangelicals, I have never regretted taking that stand and I am convinced that it is only when we take action on issues of belief and are willing to put issues of   faith before order that the Church of England will see the deep change it so urgently needs.     The Rev Charles Raven is the former vicar of St John the Baptist, Kidderminster, Worcestershire. He is now the vicar of Christ Church,   END

By FRANK MORRISS THE WANDERER   Anglicanism, that is, the religion of an English established church whose head on earth is the British monarch, began based on one of those monarchs' self-serving judgment that he could marry as many times as necessary to produce a male heir. Henry VIII at first veiled that seizure of authority from its legitimate possessor, the Bishop of Rome, in scruples about the validity of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. He made a private interpretation of Scripture to argue his vows with the Spanish princess were invalid because she had been once married to his deceased brother, Arthur. Rome rejected his petition for an annulment from Catherine on the grounds a dispensation had been granted from whatever impediment might be involved, and later, Catherine, defending her marriage to Henry, insisted the marriage to 16-year-old Arthur (even then sickly) had never been consummated. Her confessor, Bishop John Fisher, argued in her favor, and he above all others would have known if in fact the marriage to Henry's brother was complete (ratum et consummatum).     For his several other marriages, Henry could find no other argument other than that he by his own declaration, approved by a supine Parliament, was head of the Church in England, and could do as he wished.   All of this defied the clear evidence in Scripture that putting ones wife away and taking another is adultery, as well as the fact that Christ made Peter, who became Bishop of Rome, as His Vicar on earth, and that the Church had recognized the Bishop of Rome and no other as having that title and authority to teach, govern, and bind and loose. In breaking with that authority, Henry and all who accepted his schism which rapidly evolved into full-blown heresy, reduced religion to being simply what its constituents, whether citizens, monarchs, or clerics or those pretending to be clerics, want it to be.   All of that must be kept in mind in considering the decision of the Episcopal Church, an offshoot or sprout of Anglicanism, that a man living in a feigned state of spousal relationship with another man, having split from his wife and children to do so, is fit to be a bishop.   Indeed, spokesmen for the majority that voted approval of this promotion of an Episcopal cleric to hierarchical status have proclaimed him more than fit for the job  they have praised him as deeply spiritual, exemplary in his ministry, a paragon of priesthood deserving the rank to which they have lifted him by his invisible halo, as it were.     That this is a step toward recognizing marriage of homosexuals is admitted by supporters of this decision, one of whom (the bishop of the Episcopal seminary) said it is just a matter of bringing along reluctant Episcopalians to accepting such a step. Approval for blessing such marriages awaits the community’s arrival at the point the homosexual activists and their supporters have planned the debauching of the marriage of man and woman by putting homosexual acts on its level.     The New Hampshire bishop-elect at the center of this parody of religion said Episcopalians are on a learning curve that will lead them to accept gays in every position of authority, which of course minimizes the real intention, that it will be an acceptance not only of their sexual appetites, but of their indulgence in those appetites by sodomy and other unmentionable sexual acts, none of which is in keeping with the decent and natural purpose of the sexual faculties given us by our Creator. The only learning curve Christians should be on is toward obeying, serving, and following Christ as closely and perfectly as possible, which includes being chaste.     Therefore, any genuine learning curve to be followed by Christians leads to Christs teaching, rather than away from it. And one of those teachings is that lust is forbidden to the Masters followers, and that sex is to be used to make man and woman one flesh. The Church has always accepted that Christ made this nuptial union analogous to His own union with His Church. It is therefore blasphemous to even consider equating the lustful acts of homosexual sex with marriage, and it is sacrilegious to attempt to dignify such unions with a blessing or liturgy, which the Episcopal Church is on it way toward doing.   Make no mistake, two major evils are involved here lust and pride, the claim of autonomy in the matter of sexual use and the claim of righteousness in asserting lust is virtue rather than vice.     There is little chance the Anglican Church, the schismatic root of Episcopalianism, will intervene effectively in what its brash American offspring is doing. For one thing, there is no effective authority at hand to do it. Just as the formal head of that Church the British monarch is a figurehead, her primate-designate, the archbishop of Canterbury, is as well. Even if he had effective power, the present holder of that office is an earth, fire, and wind worshiper. It is not likely he would be overly shocked at the desire of some within the church he heads to appear costumed as fauns, frolicking after one another piping the music of the Lupercal.     After all, the Anglican Church has surrendered traditional opposition to contraception, abortion, female clergy, divorce. It would be naive to think it will now take a stand against its shepherds engaging in objectionable activities of all sorts, and even being admired for doing so. The argument that God loves everyone is attractive in an egalitarian age that insists what one does would never be counted against the good God's desire to have all saved. Further, the revolt against the nature and meaning of human acts in favor of fides sola or even good intentions suggests that Heaven is guaranteed.     Indeed, the truth that God loves everyone is now taken as that very guarantee. That overlooks that the crucial question for God’s creatures is do they love God.      It’s easy to answer that question with of course! But then, what did Jesus mean when He said, Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father in Heaven shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And what is the meaning of the parable that tells of seven foolish virgins denied entry to the wedding feast because they let the oil of their lanterns burn out     There is not a hint of scriptural teaching, including that of Christ, that sexual satisfaction alone can provide the substance of marriage. But there is direct testimony aplenty that the use of sex to bring new lives into being is such substance. God makes woman to be man’s companion; the command to Adam is to increase and multiply. Jesus reminds His listeners that at the beginning the creation was of man and woman who can become one flesh, and for that reason any putting away of one’s wife and remarriage involves adultery. The only nuptial blessing given by Christ was at Cana.     St. Paul condemns the desire of man for man, woman for woman in no uncertain terms. And thus for those who believe in the inerrancy of scriptural teaching, in the protection of the valid episcopal college from error, must surely accept that sodomy is a major departure from that teaching, and therefore a grave sin which, if not sincerely repented and resisted, would disqualify any candidate for that college.     The decline of sexual morality in the West, and even within what citadels of Christianity as remain, is the evil fruit of a totally personalist, subjective moral jurisdiction by each individual. The privacy claimed in matters of sex  even extending to reproduction is simply an assertion of autonomy of the individual in that area of life. It makes no matter if that is the case what any other authority says, even when it is the authority of Christ's Church, headed by HisVicar on earth, or the recorded authority of God's word.     Sexual sins amount to Adams choosing to eat of the fruit that God ordered him to forgo in Eden. Not all sexual sins are of equal malice, and there may be subjective mitigation of guilt in their regard. But if sodomy and other deviant sexual use are not seriously immoral, then surely no other sexual use can be condemned, either in or outside of marriage. Give in regarding homosexual sex, and every city becomes Sodom, every person becomes a potential citizen of Gomorrah.     None of the above is meant to insult or denigrate or even discourage sincere Anglicans or Episcopalians. And undoubtedly some may be ignorant of the issues involved in the origins and directions of their denominations. But most educated persons of those churches must recognize some facts of history. They must recognize how the Church of England drifted into a state of indifference to the meaning of apostolicity, entering a state of quasi-Protestantism and surrendered the full sacramentalism (most disastrously the Mass) that it kept at its very beginning (though for only a matter of months).   If they know anything about the revolt of the Non-Jurors against the acceptance of Protestant royal houses by the Church of England, and of the later Oxford Movement that attempted to revive Anglicanisms historic link to the Church before Henrys schism and Elizabet’s heresy, then they will know the direction of their church has been toward doctrinal and moral dissolution from the beginning.     The last serious chance for Anglicanism to choose either the substance of Catholic faith or the path to irrelevance was the issuance of John Henry Cardinal Newmans Tract 90 of the Oxford Movement. That attempted to establish a compatibility of Anglicanisms 39 Articles of Faith with the ancient Creeds and interpretations of Catholicism. The Anglican authorities of the early 19th century used Newmans tract as an excuse to silence the Oxford Movement. Many Anglicans, especially Oxfordians, went to Rome with Newman; many, many more remained with an Anglicanism now revealed as determined to resist any challenge to its presumptions to be genuinely linked to the Church Christ founded.     That has led to the present moment, when it is clear the congregational idea of being whatever members of the community want it to be puts the Anglican and Episcopalian Churches on the edge of total religious irrelevance. Gradually, if those churches do not step back from that possibility, they will merge with the prevailing culture no  matter how pagan, indecent, perverted, or diabolic that culture might become.     Other Protestant churches have already become pale shadows of Christianity, even the Christianity of their Reformation founders. A few islands of resistance to that fate remain, but it is unlikely these can remain long above the tides of secular morality (more properly, immorality).     In attempting to be relevant to such culture, Christian churches become more and more irrelevant. That is proving itself true even within some areas of the Catholic Church. Modernist theology and thought are becoming more and more unattractive, more and more like a senile nonagenarian who has lost his memory along with his recognizability as something meaningful to the following of Christ. What is prospering is traditional Catholicism faithful to the Church’s beginnings and the ongoing stream of Tradition as a parallel Revelation to Scripture.   That will be a bulwark for the Catholic Church as it rejects such enormities as gay unions, women clergy, trial marriage, legalized adultery, vice converted to virtue, sin mutated into sanctity. And reject it will, for the promise was made to the Church built upon the Rock who was Peter and now is each of his Successors, . . . and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.     It should be clear to all who have the purity of heart that enables them to have a true religious vision that such protection was not given any other church, as those gates prevail more and more over the purely human claim to hold divine credentials.     END

By Juliet Williams Associated Press     MILWAUKEE - A Roman Catholic bishop who waded into politics with a decree that lawmakers who support abortion rights can no longer receive Holy Communion has ignited a debate over the separation of church and state.     Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse cited Vatican doctrine, canon law and teachings by the U.S. bishops in an announcement telling diocesan priests to withhold communion from such lawmakers until they  “publicly renounce their support of abortion rights.” This is about as stark a decree to come down against Catholic politicians as we’ve seen in recent history, said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.     “The problem with it is that elected officials have to represent people of all faiths and none, and not adhere to one religious demand like the bishops,” he said.   Pope John Paul II appointed Burke, 55, archbishop of St. Louis in December. Burke signed the decree in November, when he still had the authority to do so, but it was not made public until Thursday.   Burke is to be installed in St. Louis on Jan. 26. The Vatican and U.S. bishops have for years urged Catholic legislators to consider their faith when they vote, and a task force of bishops is weighing whether to recommend sanctions for Catholic politicians who support policies contrary to church teachings.     In November, Burke wrote letters to at least three Catholic lawmakers, telling them they risked being forbidden from taking the sacrament by continuing to vote for measures he termed anti-life, including abortion and euthanasia.     Democratic U.S. Rep. David Obey, who received a letter from Burke, said Friday that he respects the sacred oath he took to uphold the U.S. Constitution.     Obey said Burke can instruct him on faith and morals in his private life, but should use ``persuasion, not dictation to affect his political votes.     State Senate Minority Leader Jon Erpenbach, a Democrat who was raised Catholic, expressed a similar view.     “Dictating public policy for people of all faiths by holding sacraments hostage from those who believe does not sound right,” Erpenbach said.     Dan Maguire, a professor of theology at the Jesuit Marquette University in Milwaukee, called Burke a ``fanatic who has embarrassed the Catholic Church by using bullying tactics.     “He is not a theologian and he is making terrible mistakes that have been addressed in theology in the past, Maguire said.” He’s making a fool of himself. And the politicians are absolutely within their Catholic rights to ignore him.   END

By Cara Eastwood Wyoming Tribune-Eagle     CHEYENNE - Episcopalians seeking a more conservative church might find refuge in a new, as of yet unaffiliated group founded by a veteran in the Episcopal denomination.     The Church of St. Peter, Apostle and Confessor will begin meeting Jan. 18, and the Rev. H. W. Skip Reeves is eager to plow new ground with his congregation. Initial attendance, estimated between 75 and 150 people, will be comprised mainly of Episcopalians who stopped going to church after last year’s controversial appointment of a gay bishop.     I’m the last person on Earth that many people would think to do this, Reeves said. I’ve always been what you would call a company man.     Reeves served as rector of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church for over 10 years and retired last year. His problems are not with St. Marks or any of the parishioners there, he insists, but instead with the national church.     After the General Convention, when church leaders decided to confirm openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson and recognized that bishops are allowing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, Reeves said he began to feel the church moving away from his beliefs.     I strongly feel that I am not leaving the Episcopal Church, it has left me, he said in a recent letter to the Tribune-Eagle.     Reeves departure from his 34-year connection to the Episcopal Church comes after weathering several major storms like the altering of the prayerbook and the ordination of women.     But the confirmation of Robinson, however, was the last straw for Reeves and many other conservative Anglicans.     The perception of conservatives is that this is a gross violation of interpretation of scripture, Reeves said.     The Episcopal Church’s lack of official doctrine or statement of faith is part of the problem, Reeves said.     The Church of St. Peter, Apostle and Confessor, however, will be what Reeves calls a confessing church: meaning that the congregation will be guided by a statement of faith and will not hesitate to state what it believes.     St. Mark’s lost 40 percent of attendance after Bishop Robinson’s confirmation, Reeves said.     Although he made a point to not stir up dissention because of his personal view of the issue, Reeves said many dissatisfied parishioners came to him for help and advice on where to go. He waited until he officially retired before founding a new church.     Episcopalians generally don’t change denominations, he said. They just stop going to church.     Reeves said the new church would welcome homosexual people into the congregation, so long as they are celibate or have the desire to try and convert to heterosexuality.     It’s the behavior that contradicts scripture, Reeves said. Not the individuals.   END

Board Never appointed Mr. Bloom as the CEO of BA, say majority board members. For the record Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo had no hand in the writing of this rejoinder.   September 9, 2025   The following statement is from the majority UK Board members of Barnabas Aid in response to a “New CEO Trying to Save Barnabas Aid” by Tim Wyatt, 16 July 2025 https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/07/new-ceo-colin-bloom-save-barnabas-aid/   The metaphor of the crashing plane (p2) implies that Barnabas Aid was about to crash when Colin Bloom took over the leadership. It was actually going from strength to strength – growing income, stable staff, good reputation. It was after Colin intervened that the income plummeted, staff began leaving in droves, and the Charity Commission started their statutory inquiry.   “Bloom is at the head of Barnabas Aid because the board of trustees forced out founder Patrick Sookhdeo and three top officials in 2024.” (p2) Patrick and the other three people were forced out by the board of Nexcus International, not by the board of Barnabas Aid UK. This needs to be made clear.   “Cursory internal investigation” (p3). This is an unsubstantiated criticism of those who conducted the internal investigation and those who conducted the appeal which followed.   Patrick did not pressure any Barnabas Aid staff not to cooperate with the police (p4).  The witness intimidation charges arose from a talk he gave to a crowded staff meeting in a room crammed with people when he poured out his heart to his colleagues, in the mistaken belief that the two staff who were to be prosecution witnesses were not present.   Patrick was not sentenced to community service (p4). He was sentenced to 3 months of curfew and had to pay a small sum of money.   “Network of interconnected charities all controlled by Sookhdeo and close associates.”  (p4) This would need unpacking as regards “close” and “controlled”. Some of the trustees of some of the charities were people that Patrick and those close to him never knew before those people joined the boards. Trustees would doubtless reject the allegation that they were being controlled by Patrick and his close associates.    The 2018 trial ended with a “not guilty” verdict arrived at very quickly and announced by the female foreman of the jury with a smile.  Tim Wyatt is unjustified in describing this as the jury concluding there was “not enough evidence to convict” (p4), Unless Tim Wyatt was a member of that jury, he cannot know what discussion went on in the jury room. Unlike the 2015 trial, the 2018 trial was a unanimous verdict.  Mr Wyatt should not refer to the allegation as a “crime”, especially after a not guilty verdict. This is disgracefully biased journalism.   Patrick Sookhdeo did not receive any communication from Tim Wyatt.  We have had an email from Rev. Michael Hewat, chair of the board of Nexcus International, telling us that he was informed by Tim Wyatt that Mr Wyatt had “emailed Patrick on 27 June using his personal hotmail address, giving him 5 days to respond to a list of specific questions and giving him the opportunity to respond to the allegations made against him in the CT article.”  We do not doubt that Mr Wyatt sent the email described, but it did not reach Patrick because Patrick can no longer access his hotmail address since his laptop and phones were seized by the police when he was arrested on 7 November 2025. The devices are still in the possession of the police.    Nexcus International’s IT team control the necessary passwords thus making it impossible for Patrick to move his hotmail address to another device.  So, Mr Wyatt’s email may have been read by Wiltshire Police but it has not been read by Patrick. Mr Wyatt may wish to take this up with whoever gave him the useless email address for contacting Patrick.   “An authoritarian who brooked no dissent and made financial decisions on a whim. ‘There was no rigor,’ Bloom said, ‘It was like a Roman emperor – thumbs up or thumbs down.’ Staff claimed the ministry was pervaded by a culture of fear and anyone who spoke out was punished. Retribution was swift and brutal.” (p5) This seems to be a description of the anonymous whistleblower complaints, designed to force Patrick out.  It would have been good if Tim Wyatt had reminded readers of this.  Bloom himself has never seen Patrick leading the work so is probably relying also on these same whistleblower complaints, which, as Mr Wyatt himself says, were made with the deliberate intention of forcing Patrick out and, as Mr Wyatt omits to say, were anonymous.   Other staff have made written statements in praise and appreciation of Patrick’s leadership style. If you would like to quote some, we will be happy to provide them. Since the introduction of an International CEO position in about 2015, Patrick became increasingly isolated from most of the staff, with the ICEOs (first Hendrik Storm, then Noel Frost) telling him and those close to him not to interact directly with the staff but to communicate with staff through them, the ICEO. There were processes for financial decisions and making payments, and all financial movements were known to and controlled by the ICEO.  There was a committee to decide on project grants. See below.   The article contains quotes from the Crowell and Moring report (p5-6) but does not say that the report is one-sided in that Patrick and the others accused did not respond to Crowell and Moring because they did not have confidence that Crowell and Moring were able to investigate impartially. Instead, they asked the board of Nexcus International (BAI) and Colin Bloom at least four times to provide an alternative investigator, one who was in a position to be independent and impartial, for whom they would be happy to answer questions.   It is not the UK government but the Charity Commission of England and Wales who must currently authorise payments over £4,000 (p6).   “The board replaced Sookhdeo with Bloom.” (p6). It should be made clear that this is not the board of Barnabas Aid UK but the board of Nexcus International (called in this article Barnabas Aid International) who brought in Colin Bloom, ostensibly to replace Noel Frost as International CEO. Colin Bloom has not assumed the title of “International Director” which was Patrick’s role.   Patrick has never said he is still in charge of the real Barnabas Aid (p6). TBF Trust, of which he is chair, is a charity that was formed before the charity Barnabas Aid and was for some years called “The Barnabas Fund”. For a few years, before the formation of Barnabas Aid, it was the public face and channel for giving to Barnabas Fund. However, the initials TBF now mean “The Believers’ Fellowship”.   Neither the Barnabas Aid board nor Patrick is aware of any “Sookhdeo’s supporters” turning up at Colin Bloom’s home and photographing his family (p7). But we wonder if Tim Wyatt has been made aware of the scandal surrounding Colin Bloom and his family and pets moving into a large house, owned by the charity Servants Fellowship International (SFI) without the knowledge or agreement of SFI’s board. The family’s presence and furniture prevent the building being used any more for Christian work.     “Today, every penny is accounted for.” (p8) “What has changed is our resolute commitment to acting with integrity.” (p9). These are two quotes from Colin Bloom in the article.  Under Colin Bloom, however, donations are not being used for the purposes for which they were given. At one end of the scale Mr Mark Ellse has asked for the return of a large gift which could not be used for the purpose for which he gave it but Colin Bloom has not responded.    At the other end of the scale, Waverton Evangelical Church has been giving small monthly donations to support a particular Kenyan couple which are no longer being forwarded to Kenya, but the donor church has not been told.  This kind of thing would not have happened before Colin Bloom took charge.   Colin Bloom is said to be holding regular town-hall-style meetings with donors to show them where all the money is going (p8). Even the board of Barnabas Aid UK are told virtually nothing about where the charity’s money is going despite asking for this information. So, it is hard to believe that the donors are told more.  Colin Bloom also holds “town-hall” meetings for the staff at which he indicates he will answer any questions they have, but some staff have commented that there are many questions asked at such meetings which he does not answer either on the day or in the future.  When asked about his own salary at one such meeting, he refused to give a figure. He also refused to give a figure when asked by a member of the Barnabas Aid UK board what his salary was.   Staff are said to now “make spending decisions based on evidence and data, not the whims of the founder” (p8). If this is a reference to project grants, then we have been told that the grant decisions are now made by a committee comprising representatives from each of the national boards. The identity of most of these individuals has been concealed from us, the majority of the board of Barnabas Aid UK, but from what we do know and from what we know about the other members of the national boards, it does not appear that they are people who have relevant experience to guide them in the decision-making on project grants.  Before Colin Bloom’s leadership, project decisions were made by a Projects and Disbursements Committee comprising people chosen for having relevant experience and expertise. No project decisions were made by Patrick alone and sometimes his suggestions were overridden by others in the Projects and Disbursements Committee meetings.   We have no evidence that Barnabas Aid is sending more funds [presumably meaning as project grants] than ever before, as claimed on p8.  In fact, what evidence is available to this board suggests the opposite. The management accounts of 31 March 2025 compare grants for the first quarter of 2025 (by the end of which period Colin Bloom had been in place for almost a year) with the first quarter of 2024 (ending a few weeks before the ousting of Patrick Sookhdeo).  It shows that project grants for this period in 2024 were $2,793,000 whereas project grants for the same period in 2025 were $2,304,000.   Staff members are reported to have told Christianity Today that the changes from Sookhdeo’s leadership to Bloom’s are “night and day” (p8).  We wonder if Mr Wyatt was made aware that over 20 UK-based staff in Barnabas Aid and Nexcus have left since Bloom took over.  Some were made redundant (it is noticeable that these were people loyal to Patrick Sookhdeo) and others left because they were unhappy working in Colin Bloom’s Barnabas Fund. We are aware of at least one more who is only waiting to get another job before they too leave.  Some staff have described Colin Bloom as a dictator who makes all the decisions himself.   Mark Woods describes Colin Bloom as a very experienced Christian leader (p9). But the only previous experience of Christian ministry which Bloom is known to have had is in connection with the Conservative Party and running a network of Christian care homes. Tim Wyatt himself says this in the article. Neither of these seem relevant to Barnabas Aid.   Additionally, the Chair, Mr Philip Richards, wishes to remind Tim Wyatt, the journalist, that he has been the Chairman, as indicated on both the Charity Commission of England and Wales and Companies House UK websites, for over a year. Why didn’t he contact the chair for comment?   On behalf of Philp Richards, Chairman of Barnabas Aid UK and the Majority BA UK Board. – Dr. Chris Sugden

PRESS RELEASE September 6, 2025   Dear Seminary of the Southwest Alumni and Friends,   With a heavy heart, I write to inform you that yesterday the Board terminated Dean and President Scott Bader-Saye effective immediately.   Dean Bader-Saye’s termination comes following his admission of developing an inappropriate relationship with an employee with whom he was in a supervisory relationship. The behavior violates the professional standards required of all employees of the Seminary by the Personnel Handbook and the Safeguarding God’s People policies included therein, and of the faculty by the Faculty Handbook. As Dean and President, he was responsible for abiding by those policies himself, as well as ensuring they were upheld by all members of the community and responding appropriately when they were not. As Professor of Christian Ethics and Moral Theology and Dean and President of the Seminary, Dr. Bader-Saye bore the greatest responsibility for careful compliance with these policies and for leading by example.   Though his departure will require careful planning and attention, both in the short term and for the healthy future of the Seminary, the Board, Academic Dean Ben King, the President’s Cabinet, and the faculty have begun that important task. We all have deep confidence in the day-to-day work of the formation of students and of the administration of the Seminary’s mission.   To support the Faculty and Administration in their work, the Board is looking for a short-term Acting Dean preparatory to calling an Interim Dean to serve during a search process.   The current Ethics class will be taught by Dr. Tony Baker, Professor of Theology, whose PhD is in Theology, Ethics, and Culture, and who worked with Dr. Bader-Saye to design and coordinate the Theology and Ethics portions of our curriculum. Other adjustments to duties will be communicated as they are determined.   I know that this news will be unsettling individually and collectively. I invite you to join me in prayer for all those affected, especially for our students, faculty, and staff. We place our trust in God’s deep love and power to heal. Know that we are providing pastoral resources for the community and for individuals in the coming days and weeks. In challenging moments, I find it helpful to remember our purpose, articulated in our mission statement: “Rooted in the reconciling ministry of Christ, the mission of Seminary of the Southwest is to form people for vocations of ministry, service, and healing.” Upholding the dignity of every person, maintaining healthy boundaries, and respecting professional standards are central to the lives and work for which this Seminary forms its students. These principles require truth-telling, repentance, and appropriate consequences as part of the journey of reconciliation.   I ask your continual prayers and support as we seek to be true to this mission.   With trust in the God who redeemed all of us, all sinners, through the life, death, and resurrection of God’s Son and our Savior Jesus Christ,   Signed: Rt. Rev. Kathryn M. Ryan: chair, Board of Trustees                  Rt. Rev. Andrew Doyle, Bishop of Texas

By RICHARD N. OSTLING ASSOCIATED PRESS     PLANO, Texas (AP) - Conservative Episcopalians appeared on track to launch a new nationwide protest organization Tuesday as they began the second and final day of a meeting to launch their Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.     The movement, which hopes for significant support from foreign Anglicans, was prompted by the decision of an Episcopal Church’s convention last August to approve openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. But Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, the group’s leader, told a Monday news briefing that Robinsons name wasn’t even mentioned during the first days deliberations.     Instead, he said, the 100 bishops, representing 12 dioceses and various conservative parishes in other dioceses, focused on building a united, orthodox and missionary Anglicanism in the United States.     The delegates at the meeting plan to complete an organizational charter for the network. They also are trying to produce a new theological statement based upon previous conservative platforms.     Organizers say the network is no schism but a church within a church whose followers will remain Episcopalians. One reason not to quit: most parishes would be forced to surrender their properties to the denomination.     Duncan said the Episcopal Church’s split from its own history when it endorsed Robinson, while the network upholds traditional Episcopal teaching, so who left?     Episcopal Church’s headquarters in New York has issued no formal statement about the meeting.     The Episcopal Church’s is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion, in which many overseas churches have protested Robinsons consecration. Some have broken fellowship with the Episcopal Church’s or its majority of pro-gay bishops.       The network hopes to become the American entity to which foreign Anglicans can relate. Canon Bill Atwood of the Texas-based Ekklesia Society, which aids churches in developing nations, said in a phone interview from Uganda that bishops who lead a majority of the worlds Anglicans are preparing a joint statement to recognize the network.       A leaked memo from one network activist said the ultimate goal is a replacement jurisdiction aligned with world Anglicanism. A key leader said Sunday that the concept originated with the overseas Anglican leaders and decisions on replacement are up to them.       The chief business of the Plano meeting is to agree on an organizational charter to govern the network's early phase. Some delegates worked Monday night in hopes of also fashioning a theological declaration drawn from previous conservative documents.     Perhaps the touchiest issue is whether the network should send bishops to minister to conservative parishes in liberal dioceses, even without denominational permission.       The 12 dioceses at the heart of the network have 235,000 members, or a 10th of the nation’s Episcopalians, though some parishioners in these dioceses hold liberal views.     The world Anglican leader, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, named a commission to report by Sept. 30 on solutions to the global division over the U.S. actions and a parallel dispute over Canadian church blessings for same-sex couples.     END

By David W. Virtue 1/19/2004     PLANO, TX-An orthodox Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes representing some 100 bishops, clergy and lay delegates from 12 Episcopal Church’s dioceses met for the first in time in an historic meeting here, with moderator Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan telling a press conference briefing that what will emerge is a united, orthodox and missionary Anglicanism The Episcopal Church’s is currently being torn apart over recent decisions by the church’s General Convention to pass legislation affirming same-sex rites and for consecrating an openly non-celibate homosexual to the episcopacy. Five major Christian groups: Roman Catholic, Russian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox have suspended relations with the ECUSA, with two expressing solidarity with orthodox Episcopalians. Nine Anglican provinces have suspended (impaired and/or broken) communion with ECUSA over its moral actions.       We have a seven fold purpose: To bring the Network into existence, adopt a simple charter with provision for incorporation; to give hope to the orthodox of the Episcopal Church’s, with some sense that there is a future; to adopt a structure appropriate to the Networks early life; to elect the Networks officers; to begin to create and to live as a Network with Missions DNA; to prosper the cause of Adequate Episcopal Oversight and to renew international, ecumenical and North American Anglican relationships, said Duncan.       The Pittsburgh bishop has emerged as the leader of the biblically orthodox in ECUSA and is an Evangelical Anglo-Catholic in theology and ecclesiology. He is the convener of the Network.     Duncan was at pains to avoid language like schism, parallel jurisdiction or a church within a church at a press conference, telling some 30 media that V. Gene Robinsons name was never mentioned during the first day of the two-day meeting.     We want to renew Anglicanism in this part of the world. We have a vision for a united orthodox and missionary Anglicanism. This is what this meeting is about.     We worked on the articles of a draft charter including why we felt it was necessary to produce this charter. We will also be working on a theological statement, from several groups that have already produced such statements like the American Anglican Council (AAC), Forward in Faith North America (FIFNA) and the Anglican Church Dioceses of Parishes Advent statement.     Duncan said the 12 orthodox dioceses sent its bishop and four representatives, representing clusters from different parts of the country where there is hostility to what we stand for. He cited the need in such areas as New England, Southeast US and West Coast where there were small clusters of biblically orthodox believers in largely hostile dioceses.     Responding to a question about how this Network can work inside the Episcopal Church’s when clearly it could not hope to win politically, Duncan responded by saying that The Episcopal Church’s exceeded its own constitution and was functioning outside of its own authority but we are working within that constitutional framework.     Duncan acknowledged that there was disagreement about how we did this. We are faithful Episcopalians. We are staying within the constitution. We want to be in The Episcopal Church’s but not of it.     The other side split from its own history and the communion this summer [at General Convention], not us.     Asked what brought them to this point, Duncan replied that there were theological developments and a decision that 13 of our bishops took in November with a Memorandum of Agreement. We are about historic faith and order. Robinson is not the issue. He [Robinson] would not have been consecrated if there had been an agreed upon understanding of its [the church’s] constitution. The Episcopal Church’s can’t do that it must come back.     Duncan said 11 of the 12 bishops were there; the 12th Bishop Terence Kelshaw from the Diocese of the Rio Grande could not be present but sent a full voting delegation.     The conference is being held at the 2,000-member Christ Church, Plano parish under the rectorship of Canon David Roseberry.     END